Talk:David Ben-Gurion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David Ben-Gurion article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article is part of the "20th Century post-colonial leaders" set of articles nominated for Version 0.7. Discuss this nomination, or see the set nominations page for more details.
Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified David Ben-Gurion as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Spanish language Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Disguisting article

This is not the place to settle political differences. Basing a quote on "searched in Google" is nothing short of slaunder. Either write a short anemic uncontroversial article, or get an objective professor to write a serious one (and picking the odd professor in Haifa that just happens to support your views does not count).

[edit] Rest

In response to the request for a source by AndyL to the quote: "If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel."

I initally read this on www.truetorahjews.com, and followed up on it with some google searching. It appears to be quoted often, and sourced primarily from a text by Lenni Brenner called Zionism in the Age of the Dictators.

--- can it please be re-added to the article then? ---


Brenner further sources the statement as being from Yoav Gelber, Zionist Policy and the Fate of European Jewry (1939-42), Yad Vashem Studies, vol.XII, p.199.

Yoav Gelber, to the best of my knowledge is a professor at the University of Haifa and is head of the School of History. Futhermore, he takes full credit for the article at http://hcc.haifa.ac.il/Departments/israel-stu/staff/ygelber.htm#ArticlesnotincludingarticlesinHebrew

Uhmmm, Andy, those are some tough credentials to beat. I'll leave the edit out until you have had a chance to respond. Perhaps we could collaborate on a timeline for Ben Gurion which could include both his distinguished war record and certain questionable statements.

User:Uncle.Bungle

Hi added quotes section

Quotes "We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population." David Ben Gurion, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country." David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.

"If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel." David Ben-Gurion (Quoted on pp 855-56 in Shabtai Teveth's Ben-Gurion in a slightly different translation).

== the article is full with lies ==dddd

you should take a lesson on the israely history and don't write lies. this article is have nothing with the real historic facts, and it's a graet shame to all of you!!!

i say get a life to both of you. --- big daddy sethory

[edit] Slanderous

First, this article is nothing short of anti-Semitic and biased. It attributes quotes to David Ben-Gurion falsely, and makes him appear to be an evil anti-Arab man.

Whoever wrote this article really should have taken more time to research real Israeli history and not have been so incredibly biased. This is disgusting and an insult to Wikipedia, David Ben-Gurion, and Israel.

And people wonder why I tried to add the NPOV tag. :( Jonathan Grynspan 23:21, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why is it anti-semtic to attribute quotes by a person to him? Ben Gurion was anti-arab, thats not anti-semitic it's just a fact. There's nothing anti-jewish or anti-semitic about it, it only references one jew not all of them.

How do I sign my name? It's Nordentoft.Nordentoft 22:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC) Nordentoft.

Anybody who wants to know the part that Ben-Gurion played in setting up of Israel should read "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine". Published in the UK on the 1st November 2006. By an Israeli professor of History - Ilan Pappe I think.

It is a painful read, and looks like it is close to the historical truth - 90% of the land was owned and occupied by Palestinians until "Israel" was set up.

Ben-Gurion played a very important part in the clearing of most of these areas of Palestinians - his own diaries are full of it. The land HAD to be cleared of Palestinians. When Israel was created there were more than twice as many Palestinians as Jews living there. If the land had not been cleared of Palestinians the state would not have been Jewish. Brutal methods were used. Murder, summary execution of many large groups of men, rape, terror, demolition of whole villages, lots and lots of them.

That is called Racism, and Ethnic Cleansing. It is recognised in International Law as a crime against humanity. It is what Israel is based on. If it had not been done there would today be a Palestinian majority living within the current borders of Israel.

A very great pity. A tragedy.

It needs a Mandela type truth commission to sort it out.

Somebody needs to write a truthful piece about Ben-Gurian - great Israeli - and ethnic cleanser. Father of the current problems.

[edit] Disenfranchise a quote

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country." David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.

Reason was indeed given, several times. No Chomsky-edited version of quotes, please. Original unedited ones only. - Jayjg

Jayjg Under whose authority were you granted the right to exclude content based on the source? --Uncle Bungle 00:06, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Same authority as any other editor. The quote is clearly edited, and comes from a dubious source. Please bring the whole quote directly from the source. Jayjg (talk) 02:59, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"dubious source" please elaborate. --Uncle Bungle 13:40, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The website this pseudo-quote came from, and Chomsky himself. Jayjg (talk) 17:11, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That wasn't much of an elaboration. Could you please explain "dubious source", and, more specifically, what qualifies a source as dubious. Then, please justify Chomskys classification as "dubious" withing the requested explanation. --Uncle Bungle 18:09, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A tertiary source providing a "quote" edited by a secondary source with an obvious political agenda is a "dubious source". Jayjg (talk) 17:28, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Consider the Source and a New Quote

Nahum Goldman was an infamous leftist and appeared to mentally off center. I didn't trust him.

I interviewed Ben Gurion, in June, 1971. He impressed me as a peaceful, thoughtful, and practical man. His statement to me while walking at Sde Boker -- "Yes, I would return the occupied territories to Jordan in exchange for a peace treaty. All except Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Jerusalem, because it's our capital and they destroyed the Jewish Quarter and didn't give us access to the Wall. The Golan Heights because I am for peace, not suicide."


The Golan Heights - yes the great fear that Israel will be attacked from high ground. Is Israel really that stupid - any cannon/missle can easily fire over the little height of Golan, however, the water stolen from the Golan, now that's worth keeping - swimming pools, showers, flush toilets. Israel would be using outhouses and rationig drinking water if it wasn't for stolen water.

The reputation of Ben-Gurion used to be assiduously protected. He was painted as "a dove", perhaps acting as a restraint on the other creators on Israel (people like Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir).
However, the fact that he'd not slaughtered people himself didn't help - because he'd spent years encouraging "transfer" (a process the world now knows as ethnic cleansing).
There are lots and lots of very damaging quotes from him - and they go back well before the Holocaust. eg August 7th 1937, addresses the 20th Zionist Congress in Zurich. Square brackets added by Israeli Historian Benny Morris in "Righteous Victims" p143. Text from CZA S5-1543, original texts of the speeches: "..... We must look carefully at the question of whether transfer is possible, necessary, moral and useful. We do not want to dispossess, [but] transfer of populations occured before now, in the [Jezreel] Valley, in the Sharon [that is, the coastal plain] and in other places. You are no doubt aware of the JNF's activities in this regard. Now a transfer of completely different scope will have to be carried out. In many parts of the country new settlement will not be possible without transfering the Arab fellahin" PalestineRemembered 17:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Innapproprate Injection of Opinion

I removed the line "Ben Gurion was a great leader, to be honored and respected." that was added to the end of the article. Such a line does not belong in an encyclopedia entry about a modern political leader. I would object to such a blatant statement of opinion in an article about any US President, or other state leader for that matter. Let alone to mention the fact that Ben Gurion was and still is one of the most controversial leaders of all time.

"but also shocked by the pogroms"


Ha, shocked by "all the pogroms", in poland??? Perhaps you could give proof of "all" these pogroms, because they don't exist.

[edit] David Grün or Grin?

Grün seems rather strange for a Polish Jew. There's no ü in local variety of Yiddish, I'm afraid.

[edit] Quotes

There use to be a quotes section. Who took it out and why?


[edit] Trivia

Re: FDR and David Ben-Gurion
I saw that quote in the Economist too, but really don't understand its relevence. Plus, I'm not 100% sure it indicates FDR was an anti-semite. I think a little more research would add some insight perhaps?
pkomma 15:52, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I found another source for the trivia in a Washington Post article, in the first two paragraphs:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/12/AR2006071201627.html
What I think is important is that Ben-Gurion came to DC in December 1941. Considering what was else was going on in the world at that time (Pearl Harbor, the U.S. entry into World War II), I don't think it's fair to assume Roosevelt was snubbing Ben-Gurion, though that may have been the case. Both the Economist and the Post put the non-meeting in the context of how different U.S. - Israel relations are today, and in that context is how I think it ought to be in the article. MorrisGregorian 07:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bogus Quote

The following quote is not only bogus, but is in fact misattributed to Ben Gurion

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."

As noted on the Camera site (http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=22&x_article=775), this ringer was supposedly attributed to a commissioner Israel Koenig, although no source has ever been found for it.

It certainly does not appear in the cited biography of Ben Gurion.

The next quote is not only misattributed to Ben Gurion, but misleadingly edited as well:

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population." David Ben Gurion, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.

As established by Camera, (http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=21&x_article=371), this is a distorted excerpt from a speech given by Moshe Dayan at Techion University in '69.

Camera may (perhaps) do a good job of research, but they are a highly partisan source. No possibility of a balanced summary of Dayan's views from them!
And Camera may not be very honest ....... they claim that the words "...we purchased the land from Arabs and set up Jewish villages where there had once been Arab villages..." were left out of this clip from Moshe Dayan. Then claim that this completely changes the meaning of the quote. Hardly - we know that the Zionists had only acquired 7% of the land of Israel by 1947 - hence most of the 400 villages were indeed ethnically cleansed (as Dayan is clearly intending to say - after all, he was a fighter, not a financier!).
Also, Camera is quoting from a University speech in 1969, when Dayan was a big Israeli hero. Pilger quotes him saying exactly the same thing (but without the slightly qualifying sentence) on his sudden retirement after the 1973 Yom Kippur War. PalestineRemembered 20:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

CAMERA - double check their checking. They seem to have all Jewish leadres never saying anything that isn't nice. From some of their actions these leaders must have used some words - or is it all telepathy? Go to Alternative Insight for a good discussion of CAMERA's tricks involving quotes.


Besides being extraordinarily partisan and POV - the AI article you've referenced appears to look forward to the "downfall of the Israel Lobby" - AI never establishes the CAMERA has ever been wrong about a bogus quote. They just make the unsourced claim that a certain quote from Ben Gurion in the Mearshimer paper discussed by CAMERA was actually cited (by CAMERA) from a secondary author other than the one they attributed it to - Benny Morris.

A quick Google search confirms that the bogus quotes I discussed above were misattributed to Ben Gurion, as they were actual originally stated by Israel Koenig and Moshe Dayan, without some later additions intended to make them look anti-Arab. The early mainstream Zionist leaders weren't unsophisticated enough to make openly racist statements where they could be easily quoted.

That doesn't mean, however, that many of them; like Golda Meir and Theodore Hertzl, for example, didn't hate Arabs. Kamandi

Um, anonymous user, what article are you refering to? Please clarify, and remember to sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks. -Fsotrain09 22:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I did sign it - my user name, Kamandi. And the article I was referring to was the one from AI cited by the anonymous user who replied to my notes about the bogus DBG quotes (which have now apparently been removed). Kamandi 19:04 15 August 2006


[edit] Removing links

can somebody explain why the following external link was removed? Many of its contents are being used on this page!!! *"David Ben-Gurion Quotes and Biography".

I appreciate a response!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.182.2.221 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 21 October 2006.

The link should stay. There are too few sources quoted in this article, and this page provides a lot of material and proper sources (see also Talk:Moshe Sharett#Dubious link).
Jayjg will argue that the link violates Wikipedia policies, but I don't see which policies it is actually violating. Earlier, he/she has invoked current and obsolte Wikipedia rules on External links, now he/she cites rules on reliable sources and verifiability. The link to that page doesn't violate any of those rules.
Please don't remove the link before this dispute is resolved. —Babelfisch 07:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

As explained, it violates WP:EL. Please don't re-add links to that anonymous personal propaganda site again. Jayjg (talk) 07:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

It does not violate WP:EL, maybe you could provide the actual bit that you think is problematic? 24.218.111.14

Nov. 6th, 2006


Hello Guys, this the person who add this link. there is a documented proof here that peope on this topic wanna goose out documented fact. The link to *"David Ben-Gurion Quotes and Biography" contains the most comprehnsive source about Ben Gurion on the internet. Each fact is documented by a source and page numbers.

So can you kindly point where rules are being violated?

It should be emphasised the PalestineRemembered.com is being used actively by tens if not hundreds of Wikipedia's articles.

The rules that you have pointed out VERY geenral and could be applicable toremove any link.

If the site provides differnt points of veri BASED on facts that you can verify from the provided sources, then why that is propaganda? Let other people (especially on this board) judge?

There is a history here to show Ben-Gurion from one point of view, he is a lot more complex than that. I appeal for profetional conduct on this board. Things happen here with checks and balances.

Who is in charge of that PalestineRemembered site? It appears to be a personal propaganda website without editorial oversight run by an anonymous P.O. box. Can you clarify? Jayjg (talk) 22:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


_____


Let me see if I understand you corerctly. You are saying PalestineRememeberd.com is a propaganda and the Jewish Agency (whom you are allowing its links to be present) it is not? HAMMMMMM. Nice argument.


Now having a PO box or not having is a prooof that a site is personal? or not credible? What about you? do you have a personal agend!!!!!! Are you ganna be a link inspector at Wikipedia? and selectively brand the links that you do not like?

Sorry, but I have not seen this in the rules and regulations? Who makes you the judge the and jury?

Can Somebody please help out here?

This a typical argument of most Zionists. Let us not argue the facts, and it is better let attack the messenger????


Based on WHAT FACT in the assoicated link you dispute? I do not see a rational argument here.

Again I appeal for people with some sense of fairness to help this board. It is being hijacked by Zionist who wanna present only their point view. they want the whole world to see the world the way they see it.

Can you please explain who runs the PalestineRemembered site, and how editorial quality and accuracy is ensured on it? In what way does it differ from the millions of personal websites and blogs found littering the Internet? Jayjg (talk) 17:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
A quick perusal of PalestineRemembered shows that it is a collaborative effort to document the pre-1948 Palestine with countless testimonials from survivors, before/after pictures of the towns that were destroyed, anecdotes and family trees for those that want to preserve a bit of their history - 24.218.111.14

Nov. 8th, 2006

May be once you explain who is behind the Jewish National Funds site (whom you link), may be it is time to explain who is behind? PalestineRemembered.com?

I don't fee the JA links should be taken? Points of view based on facts should be present? otherwise I would have taken the JA's links!!!

It seems you are scared to discuss the facts, I wonder what scares you?

Is PalestineRemembered.com telling the truth and that is why you are scared? PalestineRemembered.com presents the Palestinian point of view, and much of its research is BASED on declassified Israeli documents? I wonder why are you scared of the whole world knowing whom Ben-Gurion was? Why do you want the world to see this person the way you see it? if not can you kindly point that out?

Again PalestineRemembered.com is being from thousand of links on Wikipedia, why single it out now? Why are you so scared of the truth?

Can you argue the truth? You are scared. I have been trying to get you to argue the facts, and you avoid them. This unprofessional.


BTW, whom do u represent? Is the truth your objective or promoting the Zionist point of view?? HAMMM.

Which Jewish National Fund link are you talking about? Jayjg (talk) 02:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Father of the Nation

Israel's Father of the Nation is Theodor Herzl, Don't David Ben-Gurion !!! --Dream100 02:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


To add something to that from an outsider observer's point of view: I'm not even sure which one of them was worse. You should read some words of Herzl and give them a thought. Some of his thought are as hateful and twisted as the most perverted lines from Babylonian Talmud. A peaceful and honest nation should never accept people like him, Ben-Gurion or M. Begin. It's a history paradox, that people like that can even receive Nobel Peace Prize. Jassir Arafat should have never got the prize as well for that matter. It's like the Nelson Mandela paradox. - Matt C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.9.164.40 (talk) 19:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Grave of Ben Gurion

I've been to Ben Gurion's grave in the Negev desert. Why dont you tell us where he's buried??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.162.50.93 (talk) 23:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Trivia addition

There is also a Ben Gurion University. Could someone please add this.

[edit] Conversion to Mormonism

In “Born to Kvetch” I came across a passage where it is mentioned in passing that Ben-Gurion was converted to Mormonism posthumously, which I thought was staggering. Naturally I logged onto wikipedia to learn more, only to be shocked to discover that there is no mention of it whatsoever. What gives? — Muckapedia 15:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV text

Too much emphasis is being placed on ben-Gurions supposed "militarism". This is POV and disregarding evidence to the contrary (eg negotiations with Arabs, acceptance of the partition of Palestine), this stuff is anachronistic.

The same applies to the (bizarre) claim he did not adhere to universal values. This is an entirely subjective issue and does not belong here. There is just not sufficeint evidence to make such a claim. Stalin, Ho Chi Minh and Mao were all socialists and no less nationalist then Ben-Gurion. Except that Ben-Gurion was also a democrat.

PS the grave is beautiful. that is not POV. but I may change it to panoramic.

Telaviv1 (talk) 16:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Ben Gurion built up the Israeli Military as a deterrent and a negotiation tool, but was one of the first to advocate returning the occupied territories immediately after the Six Day war. He was a great believer in democracy and "missed" many opportunities to consolidate power during Israel's early years. Jimmy1988 (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Teveth and Shapira

Ceedjee, if you insist that Teveth and Shapira should be used as sources here, you should either:

  • cite the original sources, or
  • cite Morris including the qualification he gave it. The qualification is also on page 6 of The Birth revisited.

--JaapBoBo (talk) 13:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sternhell qoute

Telaviv, please don't remove this quote from Sternhell:

According to Zeev Sternhell[1] Ben-Gurion's 'intentions to which he adhered throughout the rest of his life' were well described by a declaration he made in December 1922:

[...] Our central problem is immigration ... and not adapting our lives to this or that doctrine. [...] We are conquerers of the land facing an iron wall, and we have to break through it. [...] How can we run our Zionist movement in such a way that [... we] will be able to carry out the conquest of the land by the Jewish worker, and which will find the resources to organise the massive immigration and settlement of workers through their own capabilities? The creation of a new Zionist movement, a Zionist movement of workers, is the first prerequisite for the fulfillment of Zionism. [...] Without [such] a new Zionist movement that is entirely at our disposal, there is no future or hope for our activities

According to Sternhell 'This concise, concentrated, programmatic and important speech, contained not a single word about equality, justice, universal values, or the creation of an alternative society. Only one objective was mentioned and all the energy, strength and capabilities of the young movement were directed toward achieving it.' Ben-Gurion was committed almost exclusively to building a Jewish state.

It is extremely relevant and it is from a reliable source. It indicates some of Ben-Gurions real thinking and this article would not be complete without it. If you think Ben-Gurion thought different, than find a reliable source saying that and add it. Wikipedia policy is clear: An article can be written in neutral language and yet omit important points of view. Such an article should be considered an NPOV work in progress, not an irredeemable piece of propaganda. Often an author presents one POV because it's the only one that he or she knows well. The remedy is to add to the article — not to subtract from it. [[1]]. So if you can find another source you can add it (not substitute it) and if you can't find it, apparently there is only one pov.

Besides, why should only pro-Zionist sources be allowed in this article? Sternhell's more neutral pov makes this article more NPOV! --JaapBoBo (talk) 21:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "He immigrated to Palestine in 1906"

There was no district, sanjak, vilayet, or any other Ottoman subdivision known as "Palestine" in 1906 or at any time prior to the founding of the British Mandate. On the other hand, David ben Gurion would certainly have referred to himself as living in Eretz Israel, the Land of Israel in Hebrew-speaking discourse. --J.D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.68.95.65 (talk) 21:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Drive Them Out!" quote

Looking into the edits of an editor implicated in this wiki-lobby campaign [2] led me here, as one of their first edits was to this article, to remove this sourced quote:

"We walked outside, Ben Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, 'What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said, 'Drive them out.'" - (quoted in version of Yitzak Rabin's memoirs published in the New York Times, October 23, 1979).[3]

The reason given for this removal was: "dumped the Allon quote. It is supposedly "aleaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, pub in the New York Times, 23 October 1979" Unless verified, it is more slander than anything eles)"

The question, is that true? It it from an unverified heresay leak to the NY Times? I recall reading this quote elsewhere before, and found a reliable source that supports the account:

"In 1948, when General Yigal Allon asked him, "What is to be done with the population of Lydda and Ramle?" -some 50,000 inhabitants -- Ben-Gurion, according to his own biographer, waved his hand and said, "Drive them out." Upon the occasion of BenGurion's first visit to Nazareth, he looked around in astonishment and said, "Why are there so many Arabs, why didn't you drive them out?" This is from the book here:[4] on page. 39.

Putting aside the strong possibility that this was removed by someone organized as part of a trolling organization to POV push on WP, the second question is: do we restore this edit--would it make sense to, in anycase? Or is it better left without it? I leave it up to those editors interested in creating a neutral article to assess these questions. Thanks.Giovanni33 (talk) 04:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)